A player with the ball is faced with huge amounts data which changes every fraction of a second, depending, for instance, on the movements both of his team mates and opponents.

He also has to be conscious of angles and the limitations both of his own ability and those around him - team mates and opponents alike.

Everything is perpetually in flux.

What turns out to be a poor decision, for which a player is then criticised by pundits, may in fact have been a brilliant decision at the time he made it - except that it didn’t pay off.

Wilf regularly used to be criticised for poor decision making, and I think that introduced an element of mental paralysis in his approach to the game.

He was at his most exuberant, dynamic and enterprising under Dougie, then Holloway, who probably just encouraged him to play his ‘natural game’ and enjoy himself.

Since then he has been over-coached by a series of managers (including at Man U) and much of his flair has sadly gone.

As Brian Clough used to say: “Never spurn a goalscoring opportunity by trying to make it better.”

And for more on the subject, you just have to listen to Supertramp’s hit record of yesteryear - The Logical Song.

I think there is some truth in that about Wilf. But also a desire from him to add numbers to his game. No top team were going to sign him without a decent number of goals and assists.

And to be fair to him he has added numbers, but he's also lost that raw desire to embarrass defenders time and time again. Maybe Wilf has been pushed too far.

The old Wilf was exciting, and when paired with Yannick was some of the most enjoyable Palace games I can remember watching. But even his biggest fan would have admitted that there was often no end product. What's the point of beating 3 men if the 4th tackles you. Or you duff your cross.

Whilst I do miss that edge of your seat Wilf. These maverick players must be difficult to tactically work into the system. You cant on one hand tell them to go and enjoy themselves but also work into team shapes and systems.

Top level football coaching is all about overloads and tactically creating space and exposing weaknesses. Even when fans think we are passing sideways across the back too much, the players will be trying to engineer an opportunity to play a penetrative pass.

When Wilf was at his most exciting the upper limit of our tactics was to 'keep it tight and give it to Wilf' hoping that he could do something.

At the weekend Mateta was awful and I started to empathise with where some of the criticism aimed at him came from as previously I wasn't so quick with it.

My initial defence, and argument for him in the first place, was that he did seem intent on trying to put the ball in the back of the net when opportunity came his way. That for me is what a striker should be before anything else. Equally, I'd argue Edouard looks to be getting 'more involved in play' as opposed to on the end of things, which I would guess is instructional as opposed to his natural inclination.

It is hard to judge forwards when they feed off so little. If they were missing a host of chances each game then I would be a little more assured in saying 'not good enough' however I would argue this isn't the case currently. Mateta's fumbling at the misdirected pass from TAA and the square ball from Schlupp was worthy of criticism however I haven't seen that on a consistent enough basis to really label him definitively.

One goal sticks in my mind from last season, can't remember against whom, but a quick Mitchell/Zaha bit of interplay led to a cross from the left which JPM just lunged at, in-between defenders, getting a foot on it and lo it went in. Instances such as that have been few and far between since however that demonstrated his capability to me. I feel as though our play has not been complimentary to a 'goalscoring' striker and ever since Benteke's arrival we have looked and played for multi-faceted strikers which has drawn away from their primary responsibility.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

think that was Villa early this season.

The 'beauty' of that go was the first time cross by TM into that space behind the defender making it difficult to defend. Mateta got in front of Mings and scored. Also the 1-2 with Zaha initially created the space for the cross.

When we build slowly those opportunities are minimised as the defence is in position and difficult to get behind.

Possibly not, although the two concepts are related.

I think we tend to use the term instinctive to imply that someone is able to do the correct thing/ make the right decision, without pause for thought.

Being spontaneous just means we do something on the spur of the moment without spending time considering the outcome, which may not actually be beneficial to the individual, or team.

So I suppose what I am fumbling to say is, with the speed of the game, players have to be spontaneous, but without sound instinct to go with that, the outcome may not be advantageous.

Passing to someone in space = good decision
Passing to someone surrounded by three players = poor decision
Crossing the ball when there is nobody in the box = poor decision
Crossing the ball when there are 3 attackers screaming for it = good decision
Taking on 2 players unnecessarily when a simple pass is on = poor decision
Taking on 1 player when no pass is on and you’re then through on goal= good decision.

You could go on ad nauseum. These are all professional footballers and they should be able to make these decisions easily, but apparently not.